Cover not available
Article published In:
Language and Linguistics
Vol. 21:4 (2020) ► pp.655–687

Plurality and definiteness in Chengdu Chinese

| Southwestern University of Finance and Economics,
| The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
The authors identify a plural marker -ɕiɛ in Chengdu Chinese that can apply to both count and mass nouns, encoding plurality as well as definiteness. This post-nominal -ɕiɛ differs from the pre-nominal ɕiɛ, as the latter is purely plural but not inherently definite. Our analysis shows that the pre-nominal ɕiɛ functions as a quantifier, which occupies the [Spec, NumP] position, whereas the suffixal -ɕiɛ, by virtue of being a plural marker, is base-generated in the Num0 position and move to D0 to encode both plurality and definiteness. Moreover, the two ɕiɛs can co-occur in one and the same nominal phrase, exhibiting the double definiteness effect. The syntactic analysis of ɕiɛ in Chengdu Chinese, coupled with the study of di in Cantonese, has theoretical impacts on nominal phrase structures, in particular, on “plurality” and “definiteness”. First, plural markers in classifier languages contrast with those in number languages, as the former, but not the latter, defies numerical modification. Second, definiteness can be expressed by a non-D element, which may check its [+def] feature either by undergoing an upward movement to D (or [Spec, DP]) or by agreeing with the [+def] feature of a demonstrative. Third, the DP-NP distinction is strongly supported by our account of Chengdu Chinese.
Keywords: plurality, definiteness, ɕiɛ , Chengdu Chinese, di , Cantonese
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Data presentation
    • 2.1The quantifier ɕiɛ in Chengdu Chinese
    • 2.2The plural marker -ɕiɛ in Chengdu Chinese
  • 3.Syntactic analysis of ɕiɛ in Chengdu Chinese
    • 3.1The quantifier ɕiɛ in Chengdu Chinese
    • 3.2The plural marker -ɕiɛ in Chengdu Chinese
  • 4.More on plurality: Syntactic analysis of di in Cantonese
    • 4.1Data presentation of di
    • 4.2Data analysis of di
    • 4.3A comparison between di and ɕiɛ
  • 5.Theoretical impacts
    • 5.1On plurality
    • 5.2On definiteness
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 18 October 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.00074.xio
References (52)
References
Acquaviva, Paolo. 2008. Lexical plurals: A morphosemantic approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis. 2011. The aspectual properties of nominalization structures. In Galani, Alexandra & Hicks, Glyn & Tsoulas, George (eds.), Morphology and its interfaces (Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 178), 195–278. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. 1992. A-morphous morphology (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 62). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Athanasiadou, Ifigeneia & Athanasopoulos, Panos. 2017. Plural mass nouns and the construal of individuation: Crosslinguistic evidence from verbal and nonverbal behaviour in labelling and non-labelling contexts. Cognitive Semantics 3(1). 62–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Au Yeung, Wai Hoo. 2005. An interface program for parameterization of classifiers in Chinese. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. (Doctoral dissertation.) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bošković, Željko. 2005. On the locality of left branch extraction and the structure of NP. Studia Linguistica 59(1). 1–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. What will you have, DP or NP? In Elfner, Emily & Walkow, Martin (eds.), NELS 37: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, vol. 11, 101–114. Amherst: GLSA.Google Scholar
Chacón, Dustin Alfonso. 2011. Head movement in the Bangla DP. Journal of South Asian Linguistics 4(1). 3–25.Google Scholar
Cheng, L.-S. Lisa & Sybesma, Rint. 1999. Bare and not-so-bare nouns and the structure of NP. Linguistic Inquiry 30(4). 509–542. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1998. Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6(4). 339–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. 2000. Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Doron, Edit & Müller, Ana. 2013. The cognitive basis of the mass-count distinction: Evidence from bare nouns. In Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia & Zribi-Hertz, Anne (eds.), Crosslinguistic studies on noun phrase structure and reference, 73–101. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Ghaniabadi, Saeed. 2012. Plural marking beyond count nouns. In Massam, Diane (ed.), Count and mass across languages, 112–128. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ghomeshi, Jila. 2003. Plural marking, indefiniteness, and the noun phrase. Studia Linguistica 57(2). 47–74. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giusti, Giuliana. 1995. A unified structural representation of (abstract) case and article: Evidence from Germanic. In Haider, Hubert & Olsen, Susan & Vikner, Sten (eds.), Studies in comparative Germanic syntax (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 31), 77–93. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997. The categorial status of determiners. In Haegeman, Liliane (ed.), The new comparative syntax, 95–123. New York: Addison Wesley Longman.Google Scholar
. 2015. Nominal syntax at the interfaces: A comparative analysis of languages with articles. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Her, One-Soon. 2012a. Distinguishing classifiers and measure words: A mathematical perspective and implications. Lingua 122(14). 1668–1691. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. Structure of classifiers and measure words: A lexical functional account. Language and Linguistics 13(6). 1211–1251.Google Scholar
Heycock, Caroline & Zamparelli, Roberto. 2005. Friends and colleagues: Plurality, coordination and the structure of DP. Natural Language Semantics 13(3). 201–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Chu-Ren & Ahrens, Kathleen. 2003. Individuals, kinds and events: Classifier coercion of nouns. Language Sciences 25(4). 353–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iljic, Robert. 1994. Quantification in Mandarin Chinese: Two markers of plurality. Linguistics 32(1). 91–116. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. The problem of the suffix -men in Chinese grammar. Journal of Chinese Linguistics 29(1). 11–68.Google Scholar
Julien, Marit. 2005. Nominal phrases from a Scandinavian perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 1995. Common nouns: A contrastive analysis of Chinese and English. In Carlson, Gregory N. & Pelletier, Francis Jeffry (eds.), The generic book, 398–411. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2003. Bare NPs: Kind-referring, indefinites, both, or neither? In Young, Robert B. & Zhou, Yuping (eds.), Proceedings of the 13th Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference (SALT XIII), 180–203. Ithaca: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Li, Yen-Hui Audrey. 1998. Argument determiner phrases and number phrases. Linguistic Inquiry 29(4). 693–702. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. Plurality in a classifier language. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 8(1). 75–99. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liao, Wei-wen Roger. 2011. The symmetry of syntactic relations. Los Angeles: University of Southern California. (Doctoral dissertation.)Google Scholar
Longobardi, Giuseppe. 1994. Reference and proper names: A theory of N-movement in syntax and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry 25(4). 609–665.Google Scholar
Lyons, Christopher. 1999. Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthews, Stephen & Yip, Virginia. 2011. Cantonese: A comprehensive grammar. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ojeda, Almerindo E. 2005. The paradox of mass plurals. In Mufwene, Salikoko S. & Francis, Elaine J. & Wheeler, Rebecca S. (eds.), Polymorphous linguistics: Jim McCawley’s legacy, 389–410. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rijkhoff, Jan. 1999. When can a language have adjectives? An implicational universal. In Vogel, Petra M. & Comrie, Bernard (eds.), Approaches to the typology of word classes, 217–257. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
. 2002. The noun phrase. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roehrs, Dorian. 2009. Demonstratives and definite articles as nominal auxiliaries. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothstein, Susan. 2017. Semantics for counting and measuring: Key topics in semantics and pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rullmann, Hotze & You, Aili. 2006. General number and the semantics and pragmatics of indefinite bare nouns in Mandarin Chinese. In Von Heusinger, Klaus & Turner, Ken (eds.), Where semantics meets pragmatics, 175–196. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Steindl, Ulrike. 2010. Grammatical issues in the Chinese classifier system: The case of classifier reduplication. Vienna: Universität Wien. (Master’s thesis.)Google Scholar
Stowell, Tim. 1989. Subjects, specifiers and X-bar theory. In Baltin, Mark R. & Kroch, Anthony S. (eds.). Alternative conceptions of phrase structure, 232–262. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 1991. Determiners in NP and DP. In Leffel, Katherine & Bouchard, Denis (eds.), Views on phrase structure (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 25), 37–56. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna. 1983. The possessor that ran away from home. The Linguistic Review 3(1). 89–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992. Combinatory grammar and projection from the lexicon. In Sag, Ivan A. & Szabolcsi, Anna (eds.), Lexical matters (CSLI Lecture Notes 24), 241–268. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
. 1994. The noun phrase. In Kiefer, Ferenc & Kiss, Katalin E. (eds.), The syntactic structure of Hungarian (Syntax and Semantics 27), 179–274. New York: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tang, Sze-Wing. 2001. Nominal predication and focus anchoring. In Jäger, Gerhard & Strigin, Anatoli & Wilder, Chris & Zhang, Niina (eds.), Papers on predicative constructions: Proceedings of the Workshop on Secondary Predication (ZAS Papers in Linguistics 22), 159–172. Berlin: Leibniz-Zentrum Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar
Tsoulas, George. 2006. Plurality of mass nouns and the grammar of number. (Paper presented at the 29th GLOW Colloquium, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 6–8 April 2006.)
. 2009. On the grammar of number and mass terms in Greek. In Halpert, Clair & Hartman, Jeremy & Hill, David (eds.), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics: Proceedings of the 2007 Workshop in Greek Syntax and Semantics at MIT, vol. 571, 333–348. Cambridge: MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
Vinet, Marie-Thérèse & Liu, Xiaoyan. 2008. Plurality in Chinese with a restricted class of noun-classifier words. In Clarke, Sarah & Hirayama, Manami & Kim, Kyumin & Suh, Eugenia (eds.), Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 28: Proceedings of the International Conference on East Asian Linguistics, 357–373. Toronto: Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar
Watanabe, Akira. 2017. The mass/count distinction in Japanese from the perspective of partitivity. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 2(1). 1–26. (Article 98). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wei, Ting-Chi. 2007. Nominal predicates in Mandarin Chinese. Taiwan Journal of Linguistics 5(2). 85–130.Google Scholar
Yang, Rong. 2001. Common nouns, classifiers, and quantification in Chinese. New Brunswick: Rutgers University. (Doctoral dissertation.)Google Scholar
Zhang, Niina Ning. 2013. Classifier structures in Mandarin Chinese. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Xiong, Jiajuan & Chu-Ren Huang
2020. QP for indefiniteness: With special reference to Sinhala and Chinese. Lingua 236 ► pp. 102793 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.